Booker and Drug Offenders: Left Behind

Nora Callahan, writing for Narco News, presents a layman's view of Booker as it pertains to drug sentences and says that most drug offenders will be left behind:

According to the Supreme Court, the new ruling can only be applied from this day forth, aside from prisoners still on direct appeal, and brings us to the 'left-behind.'.... today, in a federal prison near you, there are old-law prisoners (sentenced before 1984), and old, new-law prisoners (people sentenced between 1984-2004 approximate), and brand new, new-law prisoners (after 2004 - post Booker).

The 'left behind' in this series isn't best selling Christian fiction, but real people, imprisoned unfairly via US Sentencing Guidelines pre-Booker case. Most in federal prison will not experience any rapture with the notion there is a fissure in the cracks of the foundation of the war on drugs. They want to come home. Many feel personally responsible for the new movement to end injustice, but most will gain no reward for their hard work.

It really is unconscionable that Booker is not retroactive. [Via Libby at Last One Speaks.]

I've never understood how something can be ruled to be unconstitutional basis for punishment on the one hand, but be allowed to govern punishment of people still in prison after it was decided to be unconstitutional on the other.
Oh, I understand the pragmatic arguments, I just don't get how anyone can call it fair.

TL - It's much too soon to give up on the idea of retroactive application of Booker to federal prisoners whose appeals are no longer pending, at least those whose convictions became final after Ring (6/2002) or perhaps Blakely (6/2004) was decided. Way too complex legally to review here, but NOT a hopeless cause.

I think that all federal prisoners should be affected by this, there are prisoners that have been in jail for years. and it is not fair that retroactivity not apply to them. They should be included to.